CBR Article on comic industry 2015

http://www.comicbookresources.com/article/tilting-at-windmills-trouble-on-the-horizon

An interesting read and certainly very surprising coming from CBR. For what it’s worth, I applaud them on this one, despite the fact I will never really support the site given its current management/ownership. It’s nice to see honest to goodness opinion from experience. Good job by Mr. Hibbs.

While it is not really jarring to get some of this stuff, I do question a few of the points in the work and ultimately am not sure I agree with the whole picture of the “Why is this happening” suggested  by Hibbs in the write-up.

Further, I think Mr. Hibbs proposed solution is a bit of a fatalistic spire, which concerns me.

It’s a problem to have less inventory on the racks. From what I’ve seen, this can be one of the big problems of how buying comics in a direct only environment can go wrong. Thus, I don’t know about it being a solution to thrive instead of a way to, more or less, potentially survive. Yet it can also be the impetus for, as the writer says, consumers to “quit buying for good” and potentially go out of business as well. Dangerous ground.

Why would it have this effect? Well, outside of folks with subscriptions or pull lists, which are not for everyone, If “Joe new reader” doesn’t see their title on the shelf, odds are they may not ask the shop for a re-order…more often they just don’t buy it or walk out. This can kill building titles or slower-to-develop books that may have potential to someday build core audiences.

Simply put; when an industry is so reliant on potential sales, the fatal potential for a bottleneck in sales can happen. Digital sales could “feasibly” be a factor here, yet many folks are still wary. Worse, that may mean bad news for the LCS we all know and love.

For readers, not being able to get books off newsstands or book stores or needing to buy a 20.00 trade can be daunting and reduce folk’s impulse buying. I know Marvel was losing money on some of these markets, but part of me makes it think the exposure they give works in the big picture toward acquiring long-term readership. I will say, Marvel seems to have made some headway in the trade market.

Yet, part of me can’t fault the shops here. No one wants to see inventory “rot on the shelf” as he says either.  The so-called “long-game” is also difficult to swallow for shops who don’t have the backing of Disney/Marvel.

The writer gives a few solid tips to why this has gone wrong…but, IMO, they escape the main issue.

Dissing old core fans.

Old loyal readers don’t like seeing so many replacement heroes to the most popular characters. They want to feel like they can find stories of their favorite heroes. Which is not to say they won’t take new, inventive directions and titles in doses, but there has to be a happy median to attract new readers and not disenfranchise the past/ bite the hand that feeds you.

Literally, the Richard Rider/Sam Alexander case is a complete microcosm here. Maybe replacing Cap, Thor, Hulk was not such a good move. Richard Rider certainly fits here, because all of this began when Alonso took over and these kind of “en masse” changes happened. Rich Rider was quite literally the beginning of this mess. (Though I’d say the issue dated back to Ultimatum and Red Hulk, *clears throat* insert Loeb comment here))

Hickman’s odyssey was a long winded mess, but as the article suggests the tie ins were the big problem. The actual main series sold well, yet the spin offs were very zany titles that had nothing to do with prior history, prior alternate realities, and replaced fan-favorite characters. The tie-ins had a very disjointed feel nor did many of them segue into the new series and the all new. (BTW I agree with the numbering point and how the book disrupted some new titles)

Ignoring and getting sloppy with continuity is another factor.  Sure, Marvel brass often dismisses this as “internet white noise”. Yet, there’s evidence it has finally resonated. (Additionally this hits home with the new 52 stuff as well.) It’s not 2002 anymore, and some of the gripes online are legitimate.

To some extent, I see “Secret Wars” ET AL as the big test to our readers about ‘If 616 continuity matters’…and from the poor sales I do think the answer is yes.

What we have is an industry built on gimmicks, not loyal readership.

Hopefully, Marvel changes its tunes. Because despite my criticism, I really do love the company and want to support them and enjoy readership once more.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “CBR Article on comic industry 2015

  1. I agree with you 100% on the need to build audiences through increased exposure.

    I fell into comic books when, at 10 years old, I saw a copy of New Warriors #1 sitting on a spinner rack at 7-11. Out of that, grew an avid collector and supporter of the industry, amassing a large collection including every issue of every issue of every New Warriors run, every single appearance of Speedball and countless other purchases all the up to the ruination of Nova and discarding of Richard Rider when I went into comics boycott mode.

    None of that comic book fan history would have occurred without that spinner rack, and I suppose there are many other stories out there like mine.

    1. thanks man…sorry i never replied to this sooner. I went into Barnes and Noble and they have improved the trade section…which is good, but it looks more like the same amount just spread out. I also recall Dentists and Barbers having comics to read for younger patrons. I remember reading the Secret Wars issue where spidey got his black costume at my barbershop as a kid.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s